The Economics of Covert Community Detection and Hiding

We present a model of surveillance based on the detection of community structure in social networks. We examine the extent of network topology information an adversary is required to gather in order to obtain high quality intelligence about community membership. We show that selective surveillance strategies can improve the adversary’s resource eciency. However, the use of counter-surveillance defence strategies can signicantly reduce the adversary’s capability. We analyze two adversary models drawn from contemporary computer security literature, and explore the dynamics of community detection and hiding in these settings. Our results show that in the absence of counter-surveillance moves, placing a mere 8% of the network under surveillance can uncover the community membership of as much as 50% of the network. Uncovering all community information with targeted selection requires half the surveillance budget where parties use anonymous channels to communicate. Finally, the most determined covert community can escape detection by adopting decentralized counter-surveillance techniques even while facing an adversary with full topology knowledge - by investing in a small counter-surveillance budget, a rebel group can induce a steep increase in the false negative ratio.

[1]  Susan A. Murphy,et al.  Monographs on statistics and applied probability , 1990 .

[2]  John Scott What is social network analysis , 2010 .

[3]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[4]  Nick Mathewson,et al.  Tor: The Second-Generation Onion Router , 2004, USENIX Security Symposium.

[5]  Shishir Nagaraja,et al.  Anonymity in the Wild: Mixes on Unstructured Networks , 2007, Privacy Enhancing Technologies.

[6]  George Danezis,et al.  Mixminion: design of a type III anonymous remailer protocol , 2003, 2003 Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2003..

[7]  Andrew B. Kahng,et al.  Recent directions in netlist partitioning: a survey , 1995, Integr..

[8]  L. Freeman Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[9]  Ulrich Elsner,et al.  Graph partitioning - a survey , 2005 .

[10]  Shishir Nagaraja,et al.  The Topology of Covert Conflict , 2005, WEIS.

[11]  M. Newman,et al.  Finding community structure in very large networks. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[12]  M. Fiedler Algebraic connectivity of graphs , 1973 .

[13]  Alex Pothen,et al.  PARTITIONING SPARSE MATRICES WITH EIGENVECTORS OF GRAPHS* , 1990 .

[14]  Leon Danon,et al.  Comparing community structure identification , 2005, cond-mat/0505245.

[15]  George Danezis,et al.  The Economics of Mass Surveillance and the Questionable Value of Anonymous Communications , 2006, WEIS.

[16]  G. A. Koganov,et al.  An indicator for community structure , 2006 .

[17]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[18]  M. Newman,et al.  Mixing patterns in networks. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[19]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[20]  M E J Newman,et al.  Modularity and community structure in networks. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Statistical mechanics of complex networks , 2001, ArXiv.

[22]  Brian W. Kernighan,et al.  An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs , 1970, Bell Syst. Tech. J..

[23]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical recipes in C , 2002 .

[24]  R. Guimerà,et al.  Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks , 2005, Nature.